[At-Large] ICANN Announcement on Domain Tasting

[Franck Martin]

Karl, 

And you know that domain tasting was done with complacent registrars where "no money" was exchanged... 

Some people are just never happy. 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Elisabeth Porteneuve" <elisabeth.porteneuve at cetp.ipsl.fr> 
To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "Karl Auerbach" <karl at CaveBear.com> 
Cc: "ALAC Working List" <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org> 
Sent: Thursday, 13 August, 2009 9:48:55 AM GMT +12:00 Fiji 
Subject: Re: [At-Large] ICANN Announcement on Domain Tasting 

Karl, 



I see your maths in a different way. Your approach is kind of Madoff, 
inventing pyramidal money. 



This pyramidal bubble (Madoff-like value 1.3 billion $US per year) was a 
cost of AGP put on Verisign, which registry had to face all that pollution 
and increase its servers capabilities. I am happy Verisign could cope with 
that nonsense, and even happier that AGP policy was changed, thanks to all. 



Money does not arrive from nowhere, bubble is not sane. 

I do not know if $7 per domain is expensive or not, but I am quite sure the 
registry must have resources to cope with pollution like AGP. 



Kind regards, 

Elisabeth Porteneuve 



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Karl Auerbach" <karl at cavebear.com> 
To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org> 
Cc: "ALAC Working List" <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org> 
Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2009 10:58 PM 
Subject: Re: [At-Large] ICANN Announcement on Domain Tasting 


> On 08/12/2009 01:21 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: 
> 
>> As the organization that started this entire policy process, At-Large 
>> and ALAC can be proud of the results. 
> 
> I'm not so sure about that. 
> 
> The main problem with the massive add-grace stuff was not the churn but 
> the fact that it was a transfer of costs from the "domainers", who were 
> getting a free ride, onto the backs of the domain name buying public who 
> were paying for the transaction costs and the lost opportunity costs due 
> to the 5 day name lock-up. 
> 
> When you or I acquire a .com name for a year we each have to pay a 
> registry fee of about $7 to cover the purported costs that the registry 
> incurs in order to handle our transaction and publish the name into the 
> zone and operate the zone servers. We pay that fee even if we relinquish 
> the name in a week. 
> 
> That would suggest that in June 2008, where there were 15,738,292 AGP 
> names, that the .com registry was bearing a cost (at that pegged $7 
> registry fee) of $110,168,044/month - or about $1,322,016,528/year. 
> 
> There are two conclusions: 
> 
> Either the .com registry has now saved over 1.3 billion $US that we were 
> previously paying and which it is now retaining as profit. 
> 
> Or the registry fee is pegged by ICANN at a hyper inflated level. 
> 
> Either way, we the community of internet users are a Boston fish - we are 
> scrod. 
> 
> The point of this little exercise is to show that ICANN's fiat registry 
> fees, based on thing more than hot air emitted by the registries and 
> accompanied by no audit of actual registry costs, is costing domain name 
> users a very large pile of money every year. 
> 
> It is long past time that ICANN be required to perform a believable, 
> public, and deep audit of registry costs and to adjust the registry fee 
> component of domain name prices to be in conformance with those costs. 
> 
> --karl-- 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> At-Large mailing list 
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org 
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann.org 
> 
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org 
> 
> 


_______________________________________________ 
At-Large mailing list 
At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org 
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann.org 

At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org